of our religion; fo Exod. xx. 14. and fome other paffages of the law. But why this, and not the reft of the whole law of GOD, where marriage, as His ordinance relating to all mankind, is concerned? Is not this proceeding of Chrif tian churchmen, like that of the Jewish, Mal. ii. 9. where GoD complains-re have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law? The man who renders a folid reason for adopting Exod. xx. to ver. 17, inclufive, and Lev. xviii. from ver. 6 to ver. 18, inclufive, as well as many other parts of that chapter, and at the fame time rejecting Exod. xxii. 16, and Deut. xxii. 28, 29, as touching the moral intendment of them, will perform a very difficult tafk, unless he can prove that marrying a wife's fifter, for inftance, is a greater crime, and of more evil tendency to mankind, as well as more inimical to the interefts of civil fociety, than enticing a virgin-debauching herand then abandoning her to infamy and proftitution; or, that though this was a fin in the days of Mofes, yet it is no fin now, and therefore the pofitive commandments which GoD enacted to prevent it, are no longer to be confidered of any force or obligation.

It is true, that we do not keep precisely the * Seventh day as the Chriftian Sabbath, looking upon the fourth commandment, in that refpect, as ceremonial, typical, or prefigurative of fomething else (whether rightly or no does not come within my prefent defign to confider); but as to the moral part, which fanctifies a given portion of our time for the public wor fhip of Him to whom we stand indebted for all, we very rightly look upon this as the bounden duty and service of Chrif tians, as well as Jews, till time shall be no more. So with regard to the fum of fifty fhekels, or the dower according to

* I have lately feen a MS. of that laborious calculator and chronologift, Mr. Kennedy, in which he would prove, that what we call Sunday, is the true original Sabbath. This is very clear, that the week was divided into feven days, fo early as at the creation of the world (fee Gen. i.); that each day is diftinguished by the works which GOD wrought therein; that the day on which GOD is faid to rest from all His work that He had made, is called the feventh day, which he hallowed and fanctified on that account; that the fourth commandment recites all this, as the reason for its being kept holy; that the Jews have at all times obferved our Saturday as the feventh day or Sabbath; that its Greek name ZabCalov, and its Latin name Dies Sabbathi, always denoted the Jewish SABBATH; and that the day we call Sunday, is in the New Teftament called Mia Zabbalay, the first day of the week-ergo, it cannot be the feventh.

the

the dowry of virgins, (fee Exod. xxii. 16. Deut. xxii. 29.) this may be set down amongst the ceremonial or temporary obfervances of what may be called, to this purpose, the Jewish law. But with refpect. to the moral intendment of thofe laws in Exodus and Deuteronomy, which was to establish, ratify, and confirm the marriage-ordinance in the fullness of its obligation-they shall be one flesh-to prevent men from abandoning women to whoredom and prostitution, and all the bitter confequences of feduction and dereliction, thofe laws ought to be as binding on the confciences of mankind, as the morality of the fourth commandment, or of any other law of GOD whatfoever. To these purposes they are as much moral laws as any of the ten commandments. If this be not the cafe, why do we wafte the time of public worship in caufing these chapters to be red over to the people? Deut. xxii. is our first leffon for the evening-fervice every 4th of March; as is Exod. xxii. for every 8th of February in the morning. But it would be ftrange if the minifter was to preface with -"Good people, ye are affembled here to hear the word of GOD; but ye are "not to mind what ye hear, because the protection of females from the luft, villainy,

"to

M 3

very

" villainy, treachery, and cruelty of men, " is no longer an object of the laws "which I am going to read to you.

They bound the Jews, but we Chrif

tians have nothing to do with them." Dreadful as fuch language would be to hear, it fays no more, than every man does, who contends for the obfoleteness and abolition of these wife, holy, and falutary provifions for female fecurity.

With refpect to the New Teftament, the fubject of polygamy, fimply confidered, is not fo much as mentioned, either as good or bad. The more I have searched, the more I am convinced that it is not to be found, unless incidentally in the epiftles to Timothy and Titus, and there only hinted at as the poffible fituation of certain people. Nor is there the least occafion it fhould be mentioned, as it was amply explained and determinately fettled in the law which was given by Mofes (fee John i. 17.); where we do not find it faid, that one law was given by Mofes, and another law by Jefus Chrift; but 'O vouos, THE LAW-which, in the connection it ftands, muft fignify the whole law—all the law which GoD ever ordained or revealed to mortals-was given by MOSES; Grace-to pardon the tranfgreffions of

that

1

that law; Truth-to fulfil and anfwer every demand of its moral requirements, as well as every ceremonial prefiguration -came by JESUS CHRIST. Heb. ix. 15. Col. ii. 17. So that CHRIST is the end of THE LAW for righteousness to every one that believeth. Rom. x. 4.

However, as it is almoft univerfally taken for granted, that " though polygamy

might be allowed under the Old Tefta"ment," yet it is forbidden under the New Testament; and as this opinion is as prevalent as that of tranfubftantiation, and the worship of the Virgin Mary, are in the church of Rome, and for centuries. were in the church of England, let us proceed farther to examine the foundation upon which it ftands.

In the first place, I cannot find, or even conceive, an inftance in which the writings of the apostles of CHRIST contradict those of MOSES and the PROPHETS. If there could be fuch a thing, both must be rendered fufpicious-one must be falfe-both fides of a contradiction cannot be true. The adverfaries of revelation have long tried, as they have earneftly wished, to find fuch a thing, but in vain! God forbid that its friends fhould even imagine it poffible! If it be true, that the fcriptures of the Old Testament

M 4

are